Search results

Platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies embrace and enable interactions with external entities. Firms pursuing these approaches conduct business and interact with environments differently than those pursuing traditional closed strategies. This chapter considers these strategies together highlighting similarities and differences between platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies. We focus on managerial and organizational challenges for organizations pursuing these strategies and identify four institutional logic shifts associated with these strategic transitions: (1) increasing external focus, (2) moving to greater openness, (3) focusing on enabling interactions, and (4) adopting interaction-centric metrics. As mature incumbent organizations adopt these strategies, there may be tensions and multiple conflicting institutional logics. Additionally, we consider four strategic leadership topics and how they relate to platform, open/user innovation, and ecosystem strategies: (1) executive orientation and experience, (2) top management teams, (3) board-management relations, and (4) executive compensation. We discuss theoretical implications, and consider future directions and research opportunities.

Studies concentrating on digitalization and interconnected capabilities have increased over the past several decades. Digitalization capability and open innovation are perceived as sources of sustained competitiveness across disciplines. This study investigated how digitalization capability and coopetition strategy affect the sustainable performance of firms by exploring the role of internal and external factors in influencing the adoption and success of open innovation in emerging markets.

To test the hypothesis, the authors conducted a structural equation model analysis on 509 firm datasets from the hub cities in China, an innovative battlefield where multilateral cooperation and competition are interwoven for globalization, clean development and the enhancement of economic growth.

The authors found that a firm's digitalization capability positively impacts outbound/inbound open innovation, coopetition strategy and sustainable performance. This study’s results support a series of mediating effects through outbound/inbound open innovation and coopetition strategy. Also, it provides a nuanced understanding of how digitalization capability and open innovation can affect sustainable performance in emerging markets.

The present study provides a nuanced understanding of how digitalization capability and in/out-bound open innovation can affect sustainable performance in emerging markets. The authors believe this model contributes to current knowledge by filling several research gaps, and this study’s findings offer valuable and practical implications for achieving open innovation and creating sustainable performance.

This study aims to analyse the effects of (1) open innovation on corporate risk management, organisational strategy and competitive advantage, (2) corporate risk management on organisational strategy, and (3) organisational strategy on competitive advantage. In addition, it assesses (4) the mediating effects of corporate risk management on the relationship between open innovation and organisational strategy.

This exploratory and transversal study takes a quantitative methodological approach based on survey data from 251 hotel executive directors from Portuguese small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

The results confirm relationships between open innovation and corporate risk management, organisational strategy, and competitive advantage. They also confirm the importance of corporate risk management for organisational strategy and organisational strategy for achieving competitive advantage. The research demonstrates that corporate risk management has a mediating effect between open innovation and organisational strategy.

The present study proposes a model which provides better knowledge of the relationships between open innovation, corporate risk management, organisational strategy and competitive advantage. The model uses various scales to create a robust analytical measurement instrument. This research provides an in-depth analysis of the psychometric properties of the structural model’s latent variables through PLS-SEM and shows the differentiated paths of the endogenous and exogenous constructs. Finally, the importance of the role of open innovation in the process of attracting the resources necessary, that is, organisational and technological resources, to successfully operate in the hotel sector is highlighted. Thus, this research fills existing gaps in the literature.

This research can contribute to the development of new instruments and programmes to improve the operational performance of SMEs in the hospitality sector. Understanding the relationship between the constructs will allow top managers to strengthen corporate resources, technologies and dynamic capabilities, and to promote entrepreneurial policies to enhance the relationship between open innovation and competitive advantage. Ultimately, the results of this study will allow governments, national, regional and local, to create policies, programmes and incentives to help firms adopt or extend the open innovation model, thus promoting the exchange of internal and external knowledge and strengthening the dynamics of the business ecosystem.

The paper discloses the relationships between open innovation, corporate risk management, organisational strategy, and competitive advantage, by identifying the main characteristics of the constructs and revealing the linkage between them. This pioneering study analyses the mediating effect of corporate risk management between open innovation and organisational strategy and those mentioned above.

This study aims to recognize the growing importance of Open Innovation (OI) theory and practice in the broader fields of Management and Information Systems, and focuse on the relationship existing between OI and a firm’s Business Strategy. Hence, the study aims at investigating the multifaceted OI – Strategy nexus at a business level, assessing how OI initiatives influence Strategy within the Mobile Telecommunications Industry and thus contributing to framing and classifying such inherent relationship.

A data-driven research approach is used, based on 45 qualitative interviews on firms operating in the Mobile Industry and involved in OI initiatives.

Six cross-themes the OI–Strategy relationship in the Mobile Industry revolves around are identified, i.e. OI and Competitive Advantage; OI and Strategic Positioning; OI and Business Models; OI in Networks; OI and Co-opetition; and OI and Resilient Business Advantages. For each theme, examples from the sample of interviewed Mobile firms are organized and reported. The key managerial issues emerging in the attempt to relate OI initiatives and the firm’s overarching Strategy are also underscored and organized in three streams, namely, designing an open business model; achieving competitive advantage through value capture; and nurturing OI as a dynamic capability.

The proposed reorganization of real-world OI and strategic initiatives in the Mobile Industry, together with the underscoring of key managerial issues, constitutes a comprehensive research agenda or roadmap, with value for both academics and practitioners.

This paper aims to focus on the human side of inbound open innovation by analyzing the effects that the adoption of different knowledge search strategies for innovation has on new recruitment needs.

Building on several theoretical perspectives, the study proposes three hypotheses regarding the relationship between openness and the need to recruit people with high technical and social skills. Using a pooled panel data from the Uruguayan Innovation Survey between 2004 and 2012, the authors identify open strategies followed by the firm.

The estimation results using pooled panel data confirm that the adoption of inbound open search strategies for innovation demands the recruitment of new employees with higher technical and social skills. Technical skills are more likely to be demanded than social skills. The effects observed are moderated by the intensity in the use of knowledge and information sources (KISs).

This paper revisits the analysis of specific knowledge search strategies at the firm level. In doing so, the study looks for the effects of specific strategies combining different knowledge sources and considers different levels of use of external KISs, from narrow to wide. While other studies have analyzed the human factor as a determinant of the success of openness for innovation, this paper re-examines the direction of this relationship. Finally, the study contributes to the evidence from a Latin American country, where these topics have received less attention.

Establishing a competitive advantage in today's dynamic environment involves optimizing an organization's exploration and exploitation strategy. This paper aims to explore how an open innovation strategy complements the organization's ambidextrous strategy in attaining a competitive advantage. Organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capability theories are also explored to investigate the impact of open innovation on the organization's ambidextrous strategy and competitive advantage – especially inbound and outbound open innovation.

The authors conducted a systematic literature review using Boolean search techniques, which was focused on the research fields of the sub-areas of general management, strategy, innovation, organization studies, information management, entrepreneurship, international business, marketing, and economics, supplemented by the snowball technique.

Organizations that combine their ambidextrous strategy with open innovation attributes achieve a competitive advantage through developing their dynamic capabilities by which organizations change their value proposition. This study also shows that an ambidextrous strategy should no longer be viewed as a structural solution implemented by management, but also as a bottom-up intervention. Additionally, the authors found that the organization's dynamic capabilities establish a feedback loop, which changes the organization's ambidextrous strategy to resolve the efficiency–agility paradox.

Previous research has focused on strategic orientation; however, hardly any research has investigated how the interrelatedness of open innovation, organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities support a competitive advantage. The authors present a conceptual model that inspires new research avenues.

The purpose of this study is to figure out the factors for sustainable growth of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

In all, 27 SMEs in the area of IT (Information Technology) in Korea were analysed through interview method basically.

It is found that sustainable development of SMEs requires two kinds of open innovation which are knowledge strategy and business model. According to developing process, SMEs change their open innovation strategy in knowledge strategy and business model. The highest growth limit of SMEs depends on open innovation in knowledge strategy and business model in sequence from closed innovation in both, through open innovation in both, to open innovation in knowledge strategy and closed innovation in business model and to closed innovation in knowledge strategy and open innovation in business model.

First, the present study was conducted with IT sector SMEs in Korea. It is true that the IT sector is one of the most rapidly changing industrial sectors and is one of representative business types of SMEs in which manufacturing and service industries coexist and diverse sizes of SMEs exist (Malerba, 2002). Second, the present study relies on case study methods. It is true that case study is a method that gives excellent qualitative analysis in firm studies (Yin, 2008).

SMEs cannot survive if they do not accept open innovation in knowledge strategy and business model. SMEs that show absolute limitations in resources and manpower should absolutely implement open innovation strategies to secure more diverse resources from markets and external knowledge bases rather than preparing all resources and capabilities by themselves (Van de Vrande et al., 2009; Yun and Mohan, 2012a, 2012b).

SMEs should bear in mind the two different levels of open innovation, such as knowledge strategies and business models (Chesbrough, 2007; Chesbrough and Appleyard, 2007).

SMEs should not confuse between temporally sustainable development and infinite sustainable development. Firms that take closed innovation strategies in both knowledge strategies and business models can also grow for some time. However, because of the deepening of knowledge-based economy, not only the amount of knowledge existing in the world and the speed of knowledge distribution increased but also the customers’ demands and expectations have been observed to increase in the market immediately through social networking sites (SNS), etc. (Yun and Ryu, 2012).

Prior research on open innovation has not investigated changes in knowledge acquisition strategies of firms over time overlooking how learning from past knowledge acquisition can change subsequent search strategies. Also, prior research has focused principally on product innovation overlooking process innovation. The purpose of the paper is to introduce the concept of dynamic openness, which is defined as temporal changes in external knowledge search strategy. We explore four dynamic openness strategies – closing down, opening up, persistent open and persistent closed – and examine the impact of these strategies on both product and process innovation.

The authors used a panel dataset of 16,021 firms based on five waves (2009–2017) of the UK Community Innovation Survey (UKIS). All models are estimated using firm and year fixed effects (FE) method to control for endogeneity that arises from unobserved heterogeneity. Endogeneity and robustness tests were carried out to ensure the validity of results.

The results show that firms do use dynamic openness strategies over time leveraging learning from past searches. Specifically, the study indicates that closing down is not an effective strategy for either type of innovation. For process innovation, firms should pursue opening up strategy rather than persistent open strategy, whereas for product innovation firms could pursue either strategy, highlighting important contextual differences.

The paper contributes to the literature on knowledge acquisition in open innovation: (1) by theorizing the underlying reasons – learning from past collaborations, absorptive capacity and external knowledge heterogeneity – why firms pursue one dynamic openness strategy over another and (2) by extending literature by delineating the dynamic openness strategies that firms should pursue in process innovation vs product innovation.

The main objective of this paper is to shed light on the confusion of terminologies related to open innovation through the development of an open innovation taxonomy. By analyzing published case studies using numerical taxonomy methods, it proposes a taxonomic classification of open innovation.

Earlier work on firm collaboration and concepts related to open innovation in order to understand the main motivations, and conditions behind open innovation‐like strategies is first to be reviewed in this paper. It then proceeds to collect and systematically analyze 20 published case studies, and using numerical taxonomy methods it produces a taxonomic classification of open innovation. As a first approach to taxonomy on open innovation strategies, the UPGMA methodology used seems very promising. The taxonomy of open innovation developed here can also be used as a decision‐making tool through the comparison of open innovation strategies inherent in the taxonomy.

Through the numerical taxonomy analysis the paper has been able to objectively create groups of similar cases, and strategies therein. This paper is able to draw some interesting conclusions by identifying two general strategies of collaboration ‐ a free revealing “democratic” strategy and a formal collaboration strategy. The first involves a proliferation of partners whose technical and creative skills are specific to the industry and the source of knowledge, and where the degree of interaction plays an important role. The second broad strategy of cooperation is linked to more formal collaboration, generally firm‐firm collaboration; in this group a large focus on markets features, especially technological intensity, was found.

This paper adds objectivity to the research of different open innovation strategies by using a method developed in the natural sciences. Based on a systematic review of literature, the paper was able to identify key characters describing features and come up with a taxonomy of open innovation, which goes a significant way towards making sense of the plethora of terminology related to open innovation. Key features of different open innovation strategies are also revealed.

Four management capabilities for successfully operationalizing open innovation are: strategy and culture, ecosystem capability, internal capability and technology enablement. Surveying more than 1,000 executives on current open innovation practices and capabilities, IBM IBV was able to identify how the different operating model capabilities interact and complement each other to drive better innovation and business performance.

To help organizations build and improve their open innovation capabilities, the IBM Institute for Business Value (IBV) partnered with APQC to develop the Ecosystem-Enabled Innovation Maturity Model (EEIMM) - an open standards model encompassing four domain competencies required for successful open innovation. To assess the maturity and benchmark the performance of organizations’ open innovation capabilities, the IBV, in collaboration with Oxford Economics, used the EEIMM to survey over 1000 leaders responsible for open innovation at their organizations.

Four management capabilities for successfully operationalizing open innovation are: strategy and culture, ecosystem capability, internal capability and technology enablement. IBV analysis found that organizations that are more advanced in developing the four building blocks see significantly better performance across key financial and innovation metrics.

For every dollar of investment, the proportion of direct revenue attributed to open innovation is four times higher than for traditional innovation.

Leading organizations are embracing open innovation as a critical component of innovation strategy and investment. They recognize that adopting open innovation yields far greater returns than traditional innovation can. Recent research by the IBM Institute for Business Value (IBM IBV) reveals, for example, that as many as 84 percent of executives now view open innovation as important for their organization’s future growth.